IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/apsrev/v119y2025i2p746-762_13.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Liberals and Conservatives Rely on Very Similar Sets of Foundations When Comparing Moral Violations

Author

Listed:
  • BLUMENAU, JACK
  • LAUDERDALE, BENJAMIN E.

Abstract

Applications of moral foundations theory in political science have revealed differences in the degree to which liberals and conservatives explicitly endorse five core moral foundations of care, fairness, authority, loyalty, and sanctity. We argue that differences between liberals and conservatives in their explicit ratings of abstract and generalized moral principles do not imply that citizens with different political orientations have fundamentally different moral intuitions. We introduce a new approach for measuring the importance of the five moral foundations by asking U.K. and U.S. survey respondents to compare pairs of vignettes describing violations relevant to each foundation. We analyze responses to these comparisons using a hierarchical Bradley–Terry model which allows us to evaluate the relative importance of each foundation to individuals with different political perspectives. Our results suggest that, despite prominent claims to the contrary, voters on the left and the right of politics share broadly similar moral intuitions.

Suggested Citation

  • Blumenau, Jack & Lauderdale, Benjamin E., 2025. "Liberals and Conservatives Rely on Very Similar Sets of Foundations When Comparing Moral Violations," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 119(2), pages 746-762, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:119:y:2025:i:2:p:746-762_13
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0003055424000492/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:119:y:2025:i:2:p:746-762_13. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/psr .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.